http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...iest-most-analytically-correct-mvp-debate-all I like Kevin Pelton's point the best: Minutes played and games played should absolutely matter. VALUE means TOTAL CONTRIBUTION to me, and I have no respect for players who take games off for rest in the MVP discussion.
Yeah but he is not on ESPN or Fox Sports screaming Westbrook triple double deserves MVP!!! No one will even notice this.
So used to watching Harden do what he does, I take it for granted. If he doesn't win, I will be disappointed. He deserves this.
I love the support from the advanced metrics guys because it shows how deep Harden's influence on the game actually goes. However, because the average person is only getting force-fed their sports info from 15 second highlight clips, and "experts" spewing their hot takes like geysers, all we ever hear about is Westbrook's inconsequential triple-doubles and Kawhi's 3-and-D play on Harden.
The amount of threads ive seen with your media conspiracy comment is hilarious. I swear Ive seen at least 4 or 5 in the last 2 days
"If Westbrook falls to 9.9 assists per game I will give the MVP to harden" Chris Broussard ****ing idiot
Very interesting. I always thought the fact that Rockets are doing relatively well when Harden sits on the bench - as reflected in Harden's mediocre on/off net rating - will be counted as a pretty big strike against him, but I guess by that metric Kawhi should be penalized more. I think one of Harden's main strengths is that his numbers (traditional or advanced) are very good across the board, whereas other candidates are more hit or miss. For instance, Westbrook absolutely crushes BPM and VORP, but his Win Shares, WS/48 and TS% aren't very impressive. Curry's on-court net rating is awesome, but other than that he has nothing to show for. Durant and Kawhi are very efficient, but their volume stats are somewhat lacking. Harden actually has great team record (check), great traditional stat line for regular media people & journalists (check), and great advanced stats for more analytic-minded voters (check). So yes, Harden has a real shot at MVP this season. Just has to win 55+ games and at least maintain current season averages.
This is the difference between "media people" (Beadle, Bayless, Broussard, Nichols) and "experts" (Duncan, Lowe, Pelton; ElHassan, Haberstroh to a lesser extent)
For real. There is almost nodifference between averaging 30, 10, 10 or averaging 30,10,9.99 People are too hung up on the novelty of a triple double. Skip Bayless is a hypocrite. Just last year he was saying triple doubles are the most overrated stats in sports. what would you guys prefer in this hypothetical? 1) harden scores 35 gets 13 assists 5 rebounds on 14/21 shooting and a W Or 2) Westbrook gets 45 points, 10 assists, 13 rebounds on 15/40 shooting and an L They are just random numbers im throwing out but I feel like the answer should be 1 but it seems a lot of media members choose 2 because "triple double"
The Spurs are actually BETTER defensively when Kawhi is off the court. Imagine that Minutes | OPP FG% | Opp Off Rtg On Court | SAS | 1988 | .506 | 106.4 Off Court | SAS | 1200 | .463 | 97.9 On − Off | SAS | 62% | +.043 | +8.5 http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/leonaka01/on-off/2017
Westbrook has by far the the best Box Score plus minus in the league. So when he is on the court the thunder are a much better team. They win 80% of their games when he has a TD. When he doesn't have TD they lose. They aren't just empty stats. I don't really even like WB's game but the homerism is getting ridiculous.
Can't remember a year there were so many legit candidates. Each has a unique case to make. In 2014-15 it was pretty much just Curry vs. Harden
